Recently I had to question my very ‘Star Trek’ geek card. From one of the largest Trek conventions in the world, a poll was taken and ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ was named the worst ‘Star Trek’ movie of all time. I won’t lie when I say that I was a little shocked at this. I had honestly loved the film and thought it was brilliantly placed and a fun re-imaging of the original topic. Yes, it had a couple of minor issues, but honestly it was so fun I could easily overlook them.

Not only that, but our own self proclaimed Trekkie’s review stated the film was a “a worthy sequel to a reboot that is breathing new life into the franchise, and it is well worth the watch.” That is some decent praise, but how about another Trekkie fan that watched and reviewed the film? Our own film reviewer wrote, “… is it a flawless example of the best of sci-fi cinema? No, not so much.” I myself had mentioned that above, though he also had this to say on it: “‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ is a film for science fiction fans. It’s fun, it’ll be entertaining the second time you watch it too, and it’s non-stop action and humorous dialog.” So the battle rages on.

However, one of the stars of ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ has spoken up on the matter. While one might consider there be some bias in an actor commenting on his own film, this star just happens to be uber-geek Simon Pegg. Even though he’s appears in the film you can’t just take what he says with a grain of salt because – It’s Simon Pegg!

Many of the complaints about the film almost seem to be out of anger so what might they be angry about?

“I think they haven’t had time to live with it. They haven’t had time to review it. I think there’s a degree of stuck-in-the-mud — there’s a faction within the “Star Trek” community of kind of like, “Well, I don’t want to watch anything anymore.” Which is fine. And, absolutely, they are entitled to that. You know, it’s not for them, really. It’s kind of for everyone.”

Quite often when something goes from more indie or enclosed and takes the spotlight in mainstream media, people get angry about it. The most prevalent example of this is in music and Pegg nails it right on the head with this analogy:

“A little bit. I think it’s like when you tire of an indie band that you love because, suddenly, they get a number one single. You don’t necessarily start disliking their music, but you stop liking them because you’re pissed off that they’re famous, or whatever. “Star Trek Into Darkness” is the most successful “Star Trek” movie ever made. It is, in terms of what it took at the box office and how many people went to see it. More people saw that film than any iteration of “Star Trek” that existed before. That is probably slightly annoying to some “Star Trek” fans — which I totally understand.”

His thoughts on people who hate the album movie (sorry, still stuck on that music comparison) are a bit strong. I mean if you are hating something just because it’s popular that’s your choice but as Pegg states:

“And you know what … it absolutely isn’t the worst “Star Trek” movie. It’s asinine, you know? It’s ridiculous. And frustrating, as well, because a lot of hard work and love went into that movie, and all J.J. wanted to do was make a film that people really enjoyed. So, to be subject to that level of sort of, like, crass fucking ire, I just say fuck you. Not you, but the people who said that. It’s also that thing, as I say, that it hasn’t been around long enough. It’s the newest one. It’s the one people least recognize. If you look back at things you really love, there’s a big list: The things that you’ve got to re-watch and enjoy, they are going to be more up there. The thing that you know the least will be at the bottom. So it might be that, too, you know?”

So I have to say I feel a little bit redeemed there. Yes, I know anyone that disagrees will again point out that he’s in the movie. My retort? Simon Pegg! Also has anyone that said that recently re-watched ALL of the ‘Star Trek’ films? I’m a huge ‘TNG’ fan but ‘Nemesis’ and ‘Insurrection’ better than ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’? I don’t know. Tell me folks, is Mr. Pegg and myself right or wrong on this one?

Stuart Conover

Stuart Conover is a father, husband, blogger, published author, geek, entrepreneur, editor of Horror Tree, horror fanatic, science fiction junkie, lives in a world of comics, and a casual gamer (all of this when his wife lets him of course.) He fell in love with science fiction and horror at the same time while watching the movie Alien at probably far too young of an age while still being extremely impressionable and has been happily obsessed with both since! Around the same time he had also developed an unhealthy addiction to comic books that continues to this day!

I’m a tremendous Star Trek film fan, and yes, I make the time to watch all of the films just about every year.

I would hardly call it the worst Trek endeavor (“Generations”, the 2009 film, and “The Final Frontier” certainly have it beat, despite some redeeming moments), but the mining of scenes that had been done before *and better* in Nicholas Meyer’s nearly flawless “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” is simply shameful. The film, considering it is a “re-imagining” of a franchise that otherwise managed to keep continuity for over three decades, would have benefited from originality in the third act where instead it presented blatant pastiche in the guise of homage.

Pegg’s opinion, furthermore, is anecdotal at best. He’s an actor who got lucky with a paying gig in a cash-cow franchise; I doubt he has even the slightest requisite Trek knowledge (or even that of good screenwriting) to make a case for these films. He also essentially just reduced our criticisms to that of nostalgic curmudgeons and used the laughably irrelevant, Ayn Randian point of revenue to make his case.

Trek fans have now had over 30 years of new material on both television and the big screen to both view and critique–NEVER before has any been hated as much by the fans as the Abrams’ reboots. I think this says something about the quality of the film and its relation to the franchise more than it does the objectivity of Trek fans… just my opinion, though.

Brad Ross

Correction: 4 decades.

Dave in Texas

This is simply a case of New Coke. It is like Coke, similar in many ways, a reboot of Coke if you will, made by the people who made original Coke. The can is shiny, and it says Coke all over it. But…bubbles and shinyness do not make it a better product. JJ gave us a shiny, bubbly new cola when nary a soul was complaining about the original.

Mittens011

I’m a die hard Trekkie and I enjoyed the film immensely. My Trek sensibilities were not offended in the least. Meyer’s original film was wonderful and this re-imagined version was good as well. I enjoyed most of the parallels and was excited to see Khan back in the Trek universe, and yes, it was more of an action film as opposed to straight up sci-fi. However, Star Trek has always done an excellent job of mixing character development, strong themes, science and action into one package. The two series are both Star Trek, but there is no shame in judging them separately (or differently). I’m looking forward to the next one and will enjoy my classic Trek in the mean time. They do not need to compete with one another.

JasonMBowles

I think he really nails it when he said this was the Star Trek “for everyone.” The majority of movie goers aren’t Trekkies or even geeks, really. The original Trek and subsequent spin-offs, especially TNG, are beloved because they explored deeper issues, which they could do because they were serialized and went on for years. These are two hour pop corn movies and as such, I think they do their job extremely well.